HOMEBREW Digest #2772 Mon 20 July 1998

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  Disaster!  (sort of) (Mark T A Nesdoly)
  Hemp beer / Corny corrosion / Young rhizomes (Matthew Arnold)
  Dehumidifiers and Brewing water (Steve)
  Request suggestions / opinions / observations, etc. (dcstanza)
  Ooops - recipe follow-up (dcstanza)
  Competition Announcement - Queen of Beer (Charley Burns)
  CarboyCare/Starters/IM/Books ("Steve Alexander")
  Fw: Infection/Tests ("Steve Alexander")
  RE: fridge -- to stuff or not to stuff (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Re: a better starter method? (Alan Edwards)
  RE: Tempeture of Corny Keg. (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Fermenting carboys (Jeff Pharr)
  hallucigenic botulism (Scott Murman)
  re: Balanced dispensing (Michael Rose)
  scaling up batches ("Bryan L. Gros")
  RESULTS:  Summer Cap-Off '98 ("RANDY ERICKSON")
  grain balance (Poris)
  South African sorghum beer? (Vincent Voelz)
  fear (Al Korzonas)
  brewing an imperial stout for competitions (Jonathan Edwards)
  Tubing (Kurjanski)
  Starter Aeration/Short Lag Time Questions/Under Carbonation ("Michael O. Hanson")
  Carbonation/HBDers in the flesh (michael w bardallis)
  Schmidling; percentages; bar measures; oxygen and lag; CP filling; zest (Samuel Mize)

Have you entered a MCAB qualifier yet? NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org (Articles are published in the order they are received.) If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!! To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org. **SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL **ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!! IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail! For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to brewery at hbd.org Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via: Anonymous ftp from... ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer AFS users can find it under... /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date-warning: Date header was inserted by mail.usask.ca From: Mark T A Nesdoly <mtn290 at mail.usask.ca> Subject: Disaster! (sort of) Hello all, Up until Wednesday night my most serious brewing disaster was a tie between the time that I watched my hydrometer roll off the table just as I was reaching for it, and the time my thermometer broke in my wort mid-chill. I guess this last incident isn't so much serious as it is maddening. I just finished stocking up on bulk grains last week. 25 kg of DWC wheat malt, 25 kg of DWC pilsen malt, and 25 kg of prairie (a local maltster) 2-row. The wife & I have two cats, so I decided against keeping the malts in their original bags. I didn't want the cats to mistake it for kitty litter. I have quite a few rubbermaid containers, so I put the malt in those. The pilsen and the 2-row each *just* fit in their containers, and the wheat had lots of room left over, since that container was about twice the volume of the others. I stacked them in the corner with the 1/2 filled larger container with the wheat on the bottom and the pilsen and 2-row stacked on top. You can probably tell what happened. Wednesday evening the wife and I were greeted to a short-lived creaking/groaning sound, followed by the sound of 50 kg of malt spilling onto the floor. The bottom container buckled under the weight of the two containers on top of it, and my pilsen and 2-row spilled onto the floor. The next hour was spent scooping up whatever I could from the carpet and then vacuuming up the rest. The good news is that because of the way the containers came down, it was pretty easy to separate the pilsen from the 2-row. I also didn't lose too much malt--maybe 1 - 1.5 kg total. - -- Mark, vacuuming in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 15:12:32 GMT From: marnold at ez-net.com (Matthew Arnold) Subject: Hemp beer / Corny corrosion / Young rhizomes > Mr. Hart's statements confuse Jethro....he wants the association with >dope, but he doesn't want the association with dope to tittilate kids, who >already have more access to the illegal stuff than any previous generation. >They just can't buy a beer. This one has more twists than Medusa's hair and >will, no doubt, place another arrow in the neo-prohibitionist's quiver. The craft brewing industry is shooting itself in the foot with this one. Hemp adds little along the line of flavor and opens up a Pandora's box of troubles, especially when they deliberately play on hemp's relationship to its THC-laden cousin. If the craft brewing industry is looking (nay, begging) for a way to give neo-prohibitionists more ammunition, they've done an excellent job. I can see the slogans now "Less Taste, Twice the Controversy." I also have difficulty believing that the BATF isn't going to be all over this like a $13 suit. - ----- ObHomebrewing: I transferred my barleywine to another corny the other day. I can't wait for it to be done! I cleaned the one it was in and filled it with an iodophor solution (at the no-rinse concentration). My concern was that the chlorine in my water (more specifically, chloramine) would begin to pit my corny. I filled it up as far as I could, but I'm sure there's still a water line at the very top. Granted, it's only going to be sitting like that for about a week, but am I begging for trouble? What if I would keep it like this for a longer period of time? Are you out there John P.? - ----- Update: Two of my rhizomes are growing like mad. The one that suffered from the bunny attack has not reappeared. Looks like the survivors will do quite well. Later, Matt (yes, I've changed ISPs again *( ) - ----- Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club http://www.rackers.org info at rackers.org Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 11:21:49 -0500 (CDT) From: Steve <JOHNSONS at uansv5.Vanderbilt.Edu> Subject: Dehumidifiers and Brewing water Tidmarsh Major mentions having used a dehumidifier to help control the dankness and mustiness in the brewery. I also keep one going in my back apartment brewery and storage area here in Nashville, TN, where the humidity this time of year really starts to kick in for the next 4 months (I envy our friends Bryan and Lisa in their moving back to the cool climate of the Bay Area in California!). Anyway, I was wondering if anyone else has used the water from the dehumidifier to soften their mash water? Might be good for a Pils, perhaps? I'm assuming that this water is the result of a condensation process, with the final product being pretty similar to steam distilled water? I don't know without having it tested, however. Maybe Mr. Duddles, the Fridge Guy also knows about dehumidifiers? Steve Johnson, President Music City Brewers Nashville, TN 97% relative humidity yesterday...down "a bunch" to 60% today! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:27:19 -0500 From: dcstanza at OCC.PASEN.GOV Subject: Request suggestions / opinions / observations, etc. Hi, collective! Sorry for the length. Last night I brewed my 7th batch ever (Newbie, obviously) and it was a kit beer. Whilst I was waiting for the wort to cool off, I thought it would be an interesting idea to submit the recipe and instructions that came with the kit to the HBD and solicit comments, suggestions (please keep them anatomically possible, eh?), observations, etc. What I'm looking for is just exactly what the various and experienced voices of the HBD would say in regards to what is being sold as kit beer. I think this would be expecially enlightening for me since I really don't have a clue as to how this recipe would stack up against others; better or worse. This beer is being brewed specifically for an upcoming camping trip with some friends and relatives (mostly light mega-beer crowd) and will be filtered, kegged and force carbonated. I've purposely left out the ingredients and directions for bottling. I'll reserve revealing the name of the company (no affiliation, just a very satisfied customer) that I bought it from until later, unless nobody cares. The recipe is called Pilsen Supreme and is described as "An American style light beer with an unusually smooth mouth feel, clean rich taste and a medium golden color". Remember, I'm soliciting your opinions on the whole works - ingredients, methods, etc.; it's not my recipe and you're certainly not going to hurt my feelings in any way! Comments/questions in brackets [ ] are mine. Here's the ingredients: 4 lbs light pure unmalted extract (can) 2.2 lbs rice syrup (can) 1 lb Laaglander Dried malt Extract (bag) 1 muslin boiling bag of crushed Crystal malt (sorry - I have no idea as to how much malt this is - I'll try to find out) 1 oz Cluster Hop Pellets (1 oz is my guesstimate - the bag was unmarked) 1 oz Hallertau Hop Pellets - Alpha acid 3.2% Muntons dry ale yeast packet Directions: Remove Crystal Malt from plastic bag and place boiling bag in 6 quarts HOT (not boiling) water, cover with lid and steep for 30 minutes. [Do they expect to 'lose' 2 quarts to evaporation during the following boil, since this is a recipe for 5 gallons?] Remove Crystal malt from water and bring mix to a boil. [Questions for the collective - is this done for flavor? Are you supposed to squeeze the liquid out of the boiling bag when you remove it?] Add malt extract, rice syrup, and dry malt. Stir thoroughly until they are dissolved and bring to a boil. [No lid, of course - thanks HBD!] Add cluster hop pellets, boil for 20 minutes. Add Hallertau hop pellets and boil an additional 5 minutes. Total boiling time 25 minutes. Add mix (wort) to 4 gallons (16 quarts) of cold water in sterilzed fermenter and stir thoroughly. [I waited here for the wort to cool to approximately 80 degrees before proceeding] Add yeast and let sit for 10 minutes. Stir mix thoroughly, seal fermenter, add fermentation lock and allow to ferment 7 - 10 days. [Bottling directions followed - snipped for brevity]. That's it. I checked on the fermenter this morning (about 7 hours after I sealed it up) and the air lock was bubbling rapidly. It's in my basement at about 72 degrees, I believe. Thanks in advance for any and all comments; perhaps other newbies will benefit in seeing how a kit beer stacks up against other recipes/methods. Private e-mail replies are fine, too! Keep up the good work, HBD - you make a great resource for learning! Dave Costanza "Nothing is simple anymore - except SOME of the people we work for!" - D Costanza. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:31:33 -0500 From: dcstanza at OCC.PASEN.GOV Subject: Ooops - recipe follow-up I forgot to mention in my earlier post that the instructions did specify: SG - 1.054 FG-1.026 Alcohol range - 3% - 4%. My hydrometer read 1.052 SG. Is this close enough?? Thanks, again! Dave Costanza "Nothing is simple anymore - except SOME of the people we work for!" - D Costanza. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 98 11:59 PDT From: caburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charley Burns) Subject: Competition Announcement - Queen of Beer Ladies (and NOT gentlemen) Fire up those Kettles! Competition Announcement: The Hangtown Association of Zymurgy Enthusiasts (H.A.Z.E.) of Placerville, California is pleased to announce the Fifth Annual Queen of Beer Women Only Homebrew competition. This event is sanctioned by the American Homebrewers Association and will be judged by BJCP certified judges. Eligibility - The Queen of Beer Women's Homebrew Competition is open to all non-commercial, home brewed beers, meads and ciders produced by persons of the female gender. Beers produced by or with the assistance of persons of the male gender are NOT eligible. "Assistance" is defined as: coaching during the brewing process, measuring ingredients, performing chemical reaction and /or timing calculations, racking, bottling or in any other way manipulating wort or fermented product. Lifting of heavy equipment or full brewing vessels, milling of grain, and operation of a capper device ARE permitted. Female competition judges are eligible and encouraged to enter in categories other than those they will be judging. Summary of entry information: Entries are $5 each and should be mailed to Jack Russell Brewing Co., 2380 Larsen Drive, Camino, CA 95709 between September 16 and 26, 1998. Final judging will be held October 10, 1998 at the Brewery. Entry forms, style sheets and competition details will be available very soon at our web site: http://haze.innercite.com. Competition co-coordinators: Nora Seeley nseeley at level1.com and Beth Zangari zangari at ns.net can provide additional information and are both registering judges for the competition. Charley Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:57:25 -0400 From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: CarboyCare/Starters/IM/Books re - Hot beerstone washs in your carboys. Be careful about adding very hot liquids to a cold glass carboy. I once lost a carboy by absent mindedly turning on the hot water spigot to wash the carboy. Thermal shock! - -- re - starter flavors ... high growth starters are just going to taste bad. And even if they taste alright there is the issue of diluting your 'brewed to style' wort with 5% to 10% sized starters of 'plain vanilla' starter beer. I don't have the answer, tho' I think George DePiro is on the right track making a high growth starter, ferment it to completion, drain the 'bad beer' and top up with fresh wort maybe 12-48 hrs before pitching. - -- Dwayne Robert McKeel says about Irish Moss ... >In HBD2765 Steve Alexander comments on the effectiveness of irish moss >(IM). I contend that the proper way to gauge the effectiveness of IM is >by the amount of hot break left in your kettle. I>[...] . However, for myself, I find that using >IM helps to leave enough proteinaceous matter in the kettle to make the >effort and cost worth while. I couldn't agree less. Protein, when it's not involved in haze, is generally a very positive influence on beer body and head. Tho' I suspect that nearly all of the added hot break is really the carageenen (IM) expanding to several hundred times it's original volume in the hot wort. IMO if IM isn't solving a problem in the final beer, its use isn't indicated. I'm personally not that fond of extra glop in the whirlpool. Incidentally Fix, in AoBT indicates that HB IM levels of 1tsp/5gal, and commercial levels are at 2 to 3 times that. At yet higher levels fermentation is impared. Fix states "We found that different concentration levels did not affect the stability of finished beer, nor did they offer chill proofing". The accompanying table does show a decrease in formazin turbidity units as IM concentration increases. >[...] As for clarity of the finished product, I >find that removing the fermenting wort off from the cold break is just >as important as the amount of hot break left in the kettle. >[...] I also find that this method produces a >cleaner tasting beer. I suspect it also may help remove potential >nutrient for spoiling organisms. Any comments on this last point? Removing cold break is widely held to produce beers with cleaner flavor. I certainly agree with this. I don't believe that using IM or cold break removal can seriously be considered as an infection preventative. Removing excess fatty acids in the break, beyond the amount that your yeast can consume is a good thing in that it removes a potential head killing material. It is a nutrient, as is the protein - but there is still plenty of protein on the beer for a protein metabolizer to work on - they don't primarily because of the pH. >On another note, does anyone have any experience on minimizing mold >contaminations? Molds sporulate easily and voluminously and so airborne contamination is almost inevitable in a moldy environment. You need to control mold in the environment - not in the fermentor - unless you plan on brewing under a HEPA filtered hood. There are various antifungal agents available, and basic brewing sanitizers will kill current infestations, but one of the simplest long term controls for mold is a dehumidifier. Molds simply won't grow in a low humidity environment. - -- Scott Murman comments: > Here in America, people are paying > a premium for "pints" that are actually only 13 oz. (steal a pint > glass from your local pub and try it for yourself). I don't know how What are the relative ethics of shorting a customer 3 oz versus stealing the glass ? - -- ALAN KEITH MEEKER says ... >Subject: Any good chemistry of brewing books? >Hi. I was wondering if there are any decent books out there on brewing >chemistry and/ or brewing science? I just received a copy of George >Fix's 1989 book and am truly dismayed by the poor quality of the >information contained in it. It's hard to believe this book was proofread >at all given the multitude of errors throughout the text. If it was >proofed it apparently wasn't by anyone with even a high school level >course in chemistry! Have such deficiencies been corrected in his latest >book Principles of Brewing Science? Are there other books anyone can >recommend...? Huh ? The 1989 book was PoBS. The latest book is called An Analysis of Brewing Techniques which relates a lot of great brewing experience findings and opinions. I have a relatively short list of errata noted - the ones relevent to chemistry are pp 143 - there is something wrong with the DMS production rate equation and pp 13-19 there is something rather confusing, *maybe* wrong about some of the water ion discussion. Also I think that the level of detail in the chemistry discussions in PoBS may not impress a professional chemist, but considering it is written for a different audience I don't believe that it is bad at all. As for the "multitude of errors" - I guess I'd like to see just what you are talking about. Are these really conceptual errors - or is it the sort of imprecision that is probably necessary in a presentation to a general audience. Would you care to cite a few examples ? Other more detailed books would include Malting and Brewing Science (Chapman Hall, 1983, ~$120US) - though it is not primarily a chemistry book. I suspect that The 'Brewing Science', vol 1-3 ed J.R.A.Pollock, Academic Press (Acad.Press, 1979-1987, ~$625US) would fall in the right category. There are a lot of good titles on yeast technology - too many to list. Many good books have been published in the area of food science and chemistry - here I find almost anything with Gerald Reed's name on it to be worth the money. Enzyme technology - also many good titles check Cambridge Press for some good leads here. A lot of good stuff on food chemistry and particularly flavor technology by a little publisher AVI press. Perhaps my best advice is check the 'books in publication' list in the Brewing Techniques market guide (about $10) and scan through the book reviews in the Journal of the Institute of Brewing - full of good leads. Steve Alexander Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 15:03:28 -0400 From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Fw: Infection/Tests - -----Original Message----- From: Steve Alexander <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> To: homebrew-request@hbd.org <homebrew-request@hbd.org> Date: Friday, July 17, 1998 2:49 PM Subject: Infection/Tests >George De Piro writes that Steve Alexander says: >>>Only after the sugars and several critical amino acids are depleted and the >>>alcohol level is fairly high does beer become nearly uninfectable by >>Statements like this always frighten me, because it may make some >>believe that they can be lax in their sanitation around fermented >>beer. This is not true. Yes, the fermented beer is much less >>hospitable to many bugs than unfermented wort, but it is far from >>invulnerable. Wild yeast will gladly take up residence inside your >>keg of bright beer, and they'll invite their friends the Pediococci >>over for a party. > >Touch. I probably should have said 'much less infectable'. Finished >beer is probably infectable by only a fraction of a percent of the >organisms that could make a home in wort - but by some strange >coincidence (NOT) these few organisms are prevalent brewery problems. >Still - aside from S.diastaticus strains which exude extracellular >enzymes that can break down dextrins and starch - I don't think other >wild yeast growth is much of an issue in finished beer. Pediococcus >and some lacto's are reportedly able to survive (tho' grow??) in the >yeast cake, and acetobacteria could be a problem if air is introduced >(but then you have other problems too). If I was an infectious agent >out for a party - I'd head straight for the unfermented wort. Over in >the bright tanks the party food (sweets and fats) and air are all >gone, and everyone's asleep ;^) > >BTW - Louis Bonham's article in the May/June BT covers the topic of >unpitched wort stability testing in a similar manner as G.Fix AoBT >that I mentioned before. Louis also goes thru several more advanced >tests which can help determine whether you have infections in your >culture or starter - which is (part of) the other half of the puzzle. > >Steve Alexander > > Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:31:39 -0500 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: fridge -- to stuff or not to stuff From: "Jay Spies" <spiesjl at mda.state.md.us> >He told me that >the refrigerator would work best and most efficiently if it was >nearly empty. I am no expert on this, but from what I know, I would say the fridge would be most efficient when it is full. The reasoning is this: If empty, there is little mass other than air to hold any temperature, so the inside temperature will change, causing frequent cycling. Now, when the compressor first starts, power is used not to begin cooling yet, first the pressure needs to build up in the system so that the mechanics begin to cool. So this is really inefficient operation, unavoidable but inefficient. With the fridge loaded with items, the items will hold the temperature more constant than just air, so less wasteful cycling will occur. Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:33:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan Edwards <ale at cisco.com> Subject: Re: a better starter method? Steve Alexander asks: > Anyone have a better starter method ? I have a *simpler* method: I'm going focus on the mechanics and avoid theory of when to oxygenate, and when to decant and add fresh wort, and how soon after that is optimal for pitching. I'll leave that to the more knowledgeable. I don't worry about such things, and always make great beer, IMHO. (Except that time that I cultured yeast from the beer from the taps at a brewpub...don't ever do that! (bacteria)) I wanted to take this opportunity to show those of you who think making a starter is a hassle, that it doesn't have to be hard at all! If you don't make starters, please have a look--it's easy (and important). And for those of you who do, maybe you'll find this method a bit easier. The reason it's a bit easier is that you boil and ferment in the same vessel: 1) Put 3/4c dried extract and a several hop cones in a 1000ml Erlenmeyer (sp?) flask. Add water to reach 800ml. (SG: 1.040-1.045) 2) Simmer the wort on your gas kitchen stove for about 1/2 hour. Strain out the hops at the midpoint(+). Keep a close eye on it-- avoid boilover. (You would risk breaking the flask on an electric stove; maybe it would work with some sort of spacer.) 3) Cover the top of the flask with aluminum foil before boil (simmer) is finished. 4) Allow to cool (or force it in an ice-water bath) 4) Pitch your yeast(*) and cover with #9 stopper with an airlock. (Shake it gently to oxygenate--make foam.) 5) 2-4 days later, pitch it! (Taste it first!) (+) Taste the wort to see if you put the right amount of hops in. You'll do better next time! (*) If I'm not brewing to a particular style, I pitch the dregs from a few bottles of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. (Flame the lip of the bottle before pouring.) Great yeast--clean and flocculent! It is SO EASY to culture from SNPA bottles, that I rarely buy yeast. (I don't usually brew a particular style.) The beauty of this is you only need to sanitize the stopper and airlock! Quick, easy and effective! -Alan in Fremont Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:42:06 -0500 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: Tempeture of Corny Keg. From: Badger Roullett <branderr at microsoft.com> >How do I tell what temperature the liquid in the keg is, with out opening the >keg and exposing it to infection? You can buy from Radio Shack, for about $15, a digital thermometer with internal and external probes. Sometimes it goes on sale for less. I just use plastic electrical tape to tape the probe to the carboy or corny keg and the thin wire can easily pass over the door gasket. Works great, and you don't even need to open the door to read the temp. Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 16:03:13 -0400 From: Jeff Pharr <pharr at metsci.com> Subject: Fermenting carboys Robert Buchanan asks in HBD #2770 if multiple carboys can be produced by placing broken carboy pieces in a plastic fermentation bucket... No, no, no! Carboy reproduction is not nearly so simple. For starters, it requires both a carboy and a cargirl as well as the proper lighting and mood. Cargirls are hard to find these days because they are not legal to sell or posses. Just think of the mess that could result from a cargirl getting too close to one of your carboys during fermentation. This is just one more reason to carefully sterilize your carboys before filling them with wort. Now the plastic carboys are another story altogether... Just wasting a little bandwidth, - --Jeff Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 13:20:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Scott Murman <smurman at best.com> Subject: hallucigenic botulism Longtime readers of the HBD may find this article interesting. Then again, long time readers of the HBD may find this article cause for rolling their eyes towards the heavens and muttering under their breath. Or both. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/health/story.html?s=z/ reuters/980715/health/stories/bot12_1.html Botulism linked to peyote use NEW YORK, Jul 15 (Reuters) -- Peyote stored in a jar for months before it was ingested caused three recent cases of botulism among members of the Native American Church, according to a report in the July 16th issue of The New England Journal of Medicine. <snip> your botulism detective, SM Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:15:18 -0700 From: Michael Rose <mrose at ucr.campus.mci.net> Subject: re: Balanced dispensing Mark Swenson writes; > Now I have made a German Weiss beer and would like to produce a glass > of sparkling beer. I have read that 3.5 volumes of CO2 is appropriate > for the style and I am keeping the beer at about 50F, so this requires > about 30 psi to carbonate. No amount of fiddle would allow me to > dispense with the 3' length of 1/4" ID tubing I was using, so I went to > the archives and learned about balancing the system. I have dutifully > bought 2 x 10' of 3/16" ID tubing to experiment with. > > > Rather than experiment on the Weiss, which my wife loves (even with > most of the gas removed during the dispense) and which I don't really > plan to brew very often, I began to experiment on an ale that I cannot > find room for in my refrigerator. It is at 80F (the temp inside my > *air conditioned* home here in Miami) so 26 psi are required to > carbonate to 2.0 volumes of CO2. I carbonated it, let it sit a few > days and checked with a pressure gauge to find it at 23 psi. Not bad. > I hooked up 20' of 3/16" ID tubing (2 10' lengths spliced with a > male/male barbed connector), attach the CO2 at 25 psi and let her rip. > It's like a fire hose! Nothing but foam. Turn off the gas and the > result is the same. Why am I not getting the resistance from the hose > (which is beverage hose obtained from homebrew shops)? > Mark, you have several possible problems. 1.I don't think CO2 stays in solution at 80f. You will need to lower the temp before going any farther. 2. Asuming that the beer is at a cooler temp, procede as follows; 1. If the beer is dispensing at proper presure, just foams alot, then you have the right 3/16 tubing but its probably getting warm over that long draw. Put tubing in ice bath when dispencing. 2. If the beer is dispensing at too high a presure then you have wrong tubing or incorrect length. > Scott Murman writes; > In my post about European glasses containing measuring lines, I was > confused by a factor of 10. This would be a good sig line! Michael Rose Riverside, CA mrose at ucr.campus.mci.net Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:12:13 -0700 From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com> Subject: scaling up batches Samuel Mize wrote: >> From: David Rinker <drinker at mci2000.com> >> Subject: Recipie percentages and specialty malts >... >> Rather than clarifying things for me, this information makes it seem >> like I should add a disproportionately *greater* amount of specialty >> malts as either my efficiency drops or as my volume increases... > >I would expect their larger batches to be more efficient, not less. Aren't >large, commercial-type systems more efficient? So scaling up they might >increase the proportion of specialty grains, since they're getting MORE >extract from each pound of pale malt. I talked to Dave Miller about scaling up batches, since he's scaled up several homebrew recipes to brewpub-sized batches. He says that when you get up to barrels, you get better efficiency from the hops and worse from the specialty grains (hope I've got that in the right direction). So you have to know your system and adjust accordingly-- you can't just scale the entire recipe up from five gallons to 400 gallons or whatever. - Bryan Bryan Gros gros at bigfoot.com Oakland, CA Visit the new Draught Board homebrew website: http://www.valhallabrewing.com/~thor/dboard/index.htm Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:52:08 -0700 From: "RANDY ERICKSON" <RANDYE at mid.org> Subject: RESULTS: Summer Cap-Off '98 It's a Cap-Off, Jack! The Stanislaus Hoppy Cappers, Ceres, California held Summer Cap-Off 1998 on Sunday, July 12, 1998. See the results at http://www.jps.net/randye/winner98.htm . Congratulations to Jim Johnson for his Best-of-Show Belgian Trippel! Thanks to all judges and stewards who braved the heat and turned out to help, you did a great job! If you are on the winners list and know that you won't be attending the awards party on July 25th, call organizer Wayne Baker at (209) 538-BREW or BarleyLW at aol.com to have your scoresheets and ribbons mailed early. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 18:09:15 EDT From: Poris at aol.com Subject: grain balance Hi, BG Micro (an electronics surplus dealer) has a great deal on used Pitney Bowes postal balances. 16 ounce capacity with 0.1 ounce readability. Great for grain using multiple measurements but might be a little crude for hops. The weighing tray is about 7" by 9" and the price is $10. Their phone number is 1 800 276 2206 to order or 972 271 9834 for tech support. Web page is http://www.bgmicro.com/ Jaime Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 17:44:26 -0500 From: Vincent Voelz <voelzv at winternet.com> Subject: South African sorghum beer? I recently picked up an old copy of Zymurgy (1994) in which they describe the brewing of sorghum beer, and now I'm really eager to taste some! Every liquor store I ask doesn't have any in stock (go figure), and has no idea where they could even order it from. Does anyone know of a source where I could obtain sorghum beer? What sort of beers are out there (and obtainable)? It seems like there shouls at least be SOME distributor in the U.S. I could order some from... Also, any additional info on sorghum beer in general would be most welcome. I'm still mostly in the dark on this style.... Thanks, Vincent Voelz voelzv at winternet.com http://www.winternet.com/~voelzv Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 18:15:43 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: fear Bruce writes: >Newbie question, only second batch attempt. First some background: 5 >gallons extract Dry Stout in the primary, 35 hours into fermentation, >airlock bubbling 40+ times per minute. I chose to rack to secondary at >this point with the reasoning that the wort needed to come off excess >trub ASAP (I was not able to strain much out as it first went into the >primary and advice was that this was not good). I had trouble with the >siphon hose (1st attempt) and ended pouring into secondary using funnel >w/strainer. Needless to say I introduced much O2 into the batch during >this transfer. Also it seems to have killed the wonderful bubbling >ferment. Have I also killed this entire batch? Any salvation tips, I >pray? Firstly, the reason that the siphon kept stopping is because the CO2 that would come out of solution would make a big bubble in the hose, right? The solution is to increase the difference in height between the source and destination... this will keep the flow fast and when the bubble forms (and it will) it will get pushed down into the destination container. When you say "I was not able to strain much out" I presume you mean hops... Back when I used to use pellets (my system is quite different now), I used hop bags. These were actually straining bags made for making fruit wines, but I used them for hops. They have a fine mesh. They are made from nylon, I'm told, but they are white. They kept 95% of the hops out of the wort. I added 10% more hops to account for the bags and this seems to have given me something similar to predicted bitterness (i.e. I guessed right that I should add 10% more hops). Regarding your aeration during fermentation, this will not *kill* this batch. What it will do is increase the amount of diacetyl that is produced and as a result, your beer will be quite buttery-flavoured. If you don't like butterscotch this will be a problem, but it is not technically a stylistic fault (many stouts are quite buttery). Finally, your fermentation appears to have stopped *probably* because of one of two reasons: 1. you knocked a lot of CO2 out of solution and the beer has to get re-saturated with CO2 for it to begin bubbling out again, or 2. the first night after your transfer, the fermentation was so active that the beer simply finished fermenting (you missed all the action). While not "killed," this is not the very best way to treat your beer. It will be good for a while, but because of oxidation, it will tend to stale much faster than if you would have siphoned. I recommend that you consume this batch as quickly because it will soon show the effects of oxidation. An example of a beer made almost exactly like yours (except that it is made with oats and it is not as dry) is Samuel Smith's Oatmeal Stout. It is intentionally aerated during fermentation. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 19:53:03 -0400 From: Jonathan Edwards <jdedward at us.ibm.com> Subject: brewing an imperial stout for competitions hey now, usually when i brew, i brew for the unadulterated pleasure of it. now i want to brew for competitions. i've got a pretty good pale ale recipe i'll use and i'm developing an imperial stout...i'd like your help on the recipe. never brewed one all grain before so it's a first. here's my recipe: 15 lb. British pale .5 lb. Belgian aromatic 1 lb. American crystal 120L .75 lb. Roasted barley 1.5 lb. Flaked wheat .50 lb. American chocolate 1.5 oz. Nugget (12% AA, 60 min.) 1 oz. Kent Goldings (5% AA, 45 min.) 1 oz. Kent Goldings (5% AA, 30 min.) based on 70% efficiency...which unfortunately is my norm...will give me an og for 6 gallons of 1.083. ibu's should be about 70. my concern is that the aha description describes roasted flavor but not overwhelming. should i use more or less of the roasted barley? i figure .75lb would give me some good flavor and the .50lb of chocolate would give me color without that overlly roasted character. do the hops look okay? any comments appreciated...remember that i'm brewing this for competition so any help you could give me would be appreciated. i plan to rack this onto a yeast cake of wyeast 1056 of a 1.06 or so ale. i'm also going to hit it with about a minute of pure oxygen. thanks once again, Jonathan Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 22:21:04 -0500 From: Kurjanski <kurjan at adams.net> Subject: Tubing As I was walking through the Home Depot tonight I came across 3/8 inch vinyl tubing in the plumbing section. Is this the same tubing that I buy at the local homebrew supply shop? How can I tell if it is food grade? My local homebrew supply shop is closing its doors shortly and it would sure be nice if I can replace my tubing on occasion with the Home Depot variety. Thanks, Paul in Quincy Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 02:19:47 -0700 From: "Michael O. Hanson" <mhanson at winternet.com> Subject: Starter Aeration/Short Lag Time Questions/Under Carbonation I am responding to three previous posts. The first had to do with aerating yeast starters after the sugar is used up. I would advise against aerating starters after the sugar is used up. This may result in some oxidation. If you want to keep the yeast going, I would suggest adding more starter solution as well as aerating your starter. The yeast will use up additional oxygen more readily in the presence of sugar. This will also increase the number of yeast cells you pitch into your wort and should decrease the lag time. Sugars of various kinds are present in wort. Yeast uses sugar in the presence of oxygen. The exposure of alcohol pitched into wort or in a starter along with yeast to oxygen after aeration is likely to be less than in an aerated starter containing alcohol and no sugar. The second had to do with aeration of wort. The theory is that aerating wort will give the yeast oxygen. This allows them to engage in aerobic respiration, which is more efficient than anaerobic respiration. This increases yeast reproduction and the number of yeast cells. This is probably the main factor influencing decisions on wort aeration. This idea is covered in at least twenty books on brewing including the AHA Style Series and is a preferred method of shortening lag times. The third had to do with under carbonation. Iodine will kill yeast. Use of Iodophor may have killed the yeast if the bottles were not rinsed. Iodophor contains iodine. I don't know if the amount of iodine left in the bottles would have been enough to kill yeast. It may have been that the amount of priming sugar was insufficient to produce the desired amount of carbonation. An easy way to check this would be to determine whether you had any carbonation at all. If there is carbonation, I would suspect insufficient priming sugar. My suggestions would be to rinse bottles with clean water and check the amount of priming sugar. Based on statements indicating that beer was under carbonated, my first guess would be that insufficient priming sugar was used. Keep up the good work. I have learned a good deal from the Homebrew Digest. Mike Hanson Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 08:14:09 -0400 From: dbgrowler at juno.com (michael w bardallis) Subject: Carbonation/HBDers in the flesh Keith asks about carbonation in his Wit & Grand Cru- Our club, Downriver Brewers Guild, made a 15 gallon batch of American brown ale a couple of years ago, and about 1/3 of them failed to condition. Though we had not tracked each bottle from production through consumption (that's a lot of radio transmitter collars), the flat ones seemed to be the ones that had been sanitized in iodophor, and drained without rinsing (bottle procurement and prep chores were divided between two brewers). Also, assuming the beers were reasonably still at bottling, 2/3 cup of priming sugar may be a tad low for an effervescent beer like a wit; I'd be trying about 1 cup. Mark T. talks about how nice it is to meet other HBDers in person. How many of us will I see in Portland? Mike Bardallis Only 4 more days.... _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 10:33:31 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at mail.imagin.net> Subject: Schmidling; percentages; bar measures; oxygen and lag; CP filling; zest Greetings to all. The Holders ask: >Who or what is Jack Schmidling and why does someone name Jack Schmidling >post it? The guy's batty. There's even a movie about it. (He made it.) That WAS you, wasn't it Jack? Is it still available, maybe on video by now? - - - - - - - - - - On grist percentage: Remember, the question was not which is BETTER, but which was most likely used in a random recipe. For trading recipes between systems and brewers, the percent of grist version is close enough (given differences in boil and fermentation), and is frequently used in informal exchange of recipes. Many recipes are stated by people like me, who often wing the whole question of expected points and efficiency. OTOH, we're less likely to mess with percentage-statements too. People who are Really Serious about precisely describing a wort use percent of extract. When you see a recipe that gives percentages without specifying, you'll have to evaluate the source and guess what this particular person was probably talking about. Let's agree that, when you state a recipe by percentages, you should say which method you're using. Of course, if you want to compute a recipe for your own system, where the post-mash variables will be constant between batches and you know what they are, the percent of extract version is more precise. - - - - - - - - - - On measures: It's been noted on rec.crafts.brewing that there already ARE laws about serving shorter measures than you claim. If a bar claims to sell "pints," but doesn't, you can call the state bureau of weights and measures and turn them in. The typical result is that they start calling them "large" instead of "pints," it's unlikely to affect the actual size or price. I agree with Scott Murman that the seller should state the size. I think this would be better addressed with market pressure than with a law. - - - - - - - - - - Scott Murman writes: > Where did this notion that oxygenating the wort will reduce lag times > get started? I think the home-brewing community was noticing how much aeration helps, about the same time that they were figuring out that the typical home brewer was grossly underpitching yeast. If you have too few yeast (too few yeasts? too little yeast?) Anyway, without added oxygen, yeast can only reproduce for a few generations. So with an underoxygenated AND underpitched batch, the lag and fermentation will take much longer, because you wind up with a too-small colony. The better approach to reducing lag times IS pitching adequate yeast. As you point out, oxygenation DOES have other benefits. But historically, people DID get shorter lags by oxygenating, because they were underpitching. - - - - - - - - - - Alan in Fremont asks about counter-pressure filling. I've never done it, but I note you don't specify the temperature at which you're working. Some people chill very cold and transfer WITHOUT CO2 counter-pressure, and still get adequate carbonation. - - - - - - - - - - Tom Puskar is buying. According to The Joy of Cooking (November 1981 edition) the zest is "the gratings of the colorful outer coatings of lemons, oranges, tangerines and limes." Since you're settling a bet, I figured you'd want a fairly authoritative reference. Same source says you should "[u]se only the colored portion of the citrus skins; the white beneath is bitter." Try tasting a little of each. Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada Fight Spam: see http://www.cauce.org/ \\\ Smert Spamonam Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 07/20/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96